Glenn W. Lear, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 27, 1999
01985745_r (E.E.O.C. Aug. 27, 1999)

01985745_r

08-27-1999

Glenn W. Lear, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Glenn W. Lear, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01985745

) Agency No. 4K-220-0095-98

)

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

______________________________)

DECISION

Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of

the agency concerning his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination,

in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq. and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act

of 1967, as amended (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. �621 et seq. The final agency

decision was issued on June 16, 1998. The appeal was postmarked July

16, 1998. Accordingly, the appeal is timely (see 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)),

and is accepted in accordance with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.

On May 21, 1998, appellant filed a formal complaint, alleging that he was

the victim of unlawful employment discrimination on the bases of race,

sex, and age. Specifically, appellant alleged that on March 12, 1998, he

was written up for being involved in an accident with an agency vehicle,

while other employees were not disciplined under similar circumstances.

As relief, appellant requested that his �good driver's record [be]

reinstated as if no accident ever occurred, and wiped entirely from any

postal record.�

On June 16, 1998, the agency issued a final decision, dismissing

appellant's complaint for failure to state a claim, and on the alternative

grounds of mootness. Specifically, the agency determined that the

record reflected that all files and driving records show that appellant

has been cleared of the offense; that an agency Postmaster requested

clearance of appellant's record through the agency Safety Office; that

appellant is still eligible for consideration for a safe driving award;

that an agency Safety Official checked appellant's record and found

no notation of the accident, which is confirmed by an agency document

entitled �Employee Accident History;� and that appellant is not required

to attend driver training.

Appellant presents no arguments on appeal. In response, the agency

argues that appellant's complaint was properly dismissed for the reasons

set forth in its final decision.

The record in this case contains a memorandum dated March 18, 1998,

from an agency Postmaster to an agency Safety Official. Therein, the

agency Postmaster stated that after further investigation of appellant's

accident, he determined that there was no damage to the agency vehicle

or a customer's property; and requested that the accident be �pulled

from the log.�

The record also contains a printout entitled �Display Employee Accident

History,� addressing appellant's accident history with the agency.

Therein, appellant is listed as having one vehicle accident and three

industrial accidents in the preceding five years. The accident that is

the subject of the instant complaint does not appear in the printout.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(e) provides that the agency shall

dismiss a complaint that is moot. To determine whether the issues raised

in appellant's complaint remain in dispute, it must be ascertained (1)

if it can be said with assurance that there is no reasonable expectation

that the alleged violation will recur, and (2) if the interim relief or

events have completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects of the

alleged violations. See County of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625

(1979). When such circumstances exist, no relief is available and no

need for a determination of the rights of the parties is presented.

Here, appellant alleged that he was discriminatorily �written up� for an

accident involving an agency vehicle, though other employees were not

similarly disciplined. As relief, appellant requested that his �good

driving record� be reinstated. In its final decision, the agency stated

that appellant was cleared of blame for the accident; and that agency

records do not include the accident that is the subject of the instant

complaint. On appeal, appellant does not dispute the agency's findings.

The Commission notes, moreover, that the record contains a memorandum from

an agency Postmaster who recommended that the accident be �pulled from

the log,� as well as a copy of an agency printout of appellant's accident

history that contains no reference to the accident addressed in the

subject complaint. Accordingly, the Commission finds that the agency's

actions completely eradicated the effects of the alleged discrimination,

and there is no evidence of record indicating a reasonable expectation

that the alleged discrimination will recur. Therefore, the Commission

finds that the agency's decision to dismiss appellant's complaint on

the grounds of mootness was proper and is AFFIRMED.<1>

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and be submitted to the Director, Office of

Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box

19848, Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark,

the request to reconsider shall be deemed filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and any supporting documentation must be submitted with your

request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests

for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited

circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.604(c).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)

It is the position of the Commission that you have the right to file

a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court WITHIN

NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action

is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)

CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult

an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction

in which your action would be filed. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR DAYS of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. If you file a civil action, YOU MUST NAME AS THE DEFENDANT

IN THE COMPLAINT THE PERSON WHO IS THE OFFICIAL AGENCY HEAD OR DEPARTMENT

HEAD, IDENTIFYING THAT PERSON BY HIS OR HER FULL NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE.

Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.

"Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the

local office, facility or department in which you work. Filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1092)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. ��791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file

a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed

within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File

A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

August 27, 1999

__________________________________

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations1 Because the Commission affirms the

agency's decision to dismiss appellant's complaint for the reason

stated herein, we find it unnecessary to address the agency's

decision to dismiss appellant's complaint on alternative grounds.